7.5  8.5   8.5   9.0  9.0  8.5  10 ........nearly a perfect dive, lost a couple of marks because his arms weren't out straight enough, good form on the feet though.

 

Looks a Salmon leaping out the water to move upstream.

5 hours ago, mojo said:

I have seen 3 big decisions where VAR was used in our games.......and each time they got it wrong. 

Two against Norwich last season in the F.A cup. The ref said Willian dived and he booked Willian, VAR proved that he was actually fouled and that it should have been a penalty to us. But VAR didn't over turn the refs decision, they used that bullsh*t "clear and obvious" line to bail the ref out. Well it was clear and obvious, Willian was fouled and the ref got it wrong.

The second in that match was against Morata. He was fouled near the end of the game and was booked, and again, VAR didn't overturn the decision.

Now in this game, they use a sh*tty camera angle which makes it look like Kane's upper half of his body is onside. This angle above, which is the angle that should have been used to judge if somebody is offside or not, clearly shows that the upper half of Kane's body is offside when the ball is played.

This is why I am not as enthusiastic about it being bought in as some other people are. It's a system that can and already has been wrongly used. I still don't think we will get big calls in our favour once it's bought in permanently. As long as they use angles like they used today to judge if somebody is offside or not, or if they use the "it wasn't clear and obvious" excuse, then VAR will never work.

Mile. Off.

VAR needs better angles.

Edited January 9, 20197 yr by Charles Ryder

5 hours ago, robdog said:

5 hours ago, CFCCAN said:

7.5  8.5   8.5   9.0  9.0  8.5  10 ........nearly a perfect dive, lost a couple of marks because his arms weren't out straight enough, good form on the feet though.

 

Looks a Salmon leaping out the water to move upstream.

A f**king ugly dribbling one at that!

In my mind, if you need multi-angle freeze-frames to see if an attacker might be 1cm further forward than the attacker then he's not offside. I thought everybody agreed about this when Morata had those two go offside decisions go against him recently.

7 hours ago, Socrates said:

Thought we controlled the game but without a recognised striker we weren’t very convincing upfront. Relied mainly on long range efforts. Christensen probably had the best chance but made a real mess of it.

Don’t know where Morata was but we really needed a focal point. Hazard did his best and CHO was bright but Hazard desperately needs more help. He didn’t get it from Barkley and Willian who were really disappointing.  Defence was solid though. 

Fully agree, we were easily the better side in the game, I cant understand how anyone can say spuds were comfortable, they had no outlet for the majority of the game and we had most of the play near their goal. Again, as tou say the lack of a focal point striker hurt us, with a goal scoring forward we would have won with ease. Christensens chance was weird, why go with his right foot and not his left?

As for the VAR Farce, if they care going to use it then get it f**king right. The linesman putting his flag up and stopping should instantly mean VAR cannot be used as he has interfered with play, defenders will stop, keepers will ease off etc, which is what happened. But to then use the wrong angle to get the wrong decision, beggars belief. I expect we will get a full apology from the FA about it.......like f**k we will. Corrupt bastards.

Edited January 9, 20197 yr by dkw

48 minutes ago, bluedave said:

In my mind, if you need multi-angle freeze-frames to see if an attacker might be 1cm further forward than the attacker then he's not offside. I thought everybody agreed about this when Morata had those two go offside decisions go against him recently.

But we didnt need multi angle freeze frame, the linesman put his flag up and was right.

9 hours ago, EdinburghBlue said:

You’re free to assume peoples knowledge on football all you want, but you have no idea the qualifications/level that anyone on this board has studied or played. I’m not overly fussed if it’s directed at me or not (not sure why you’ve referenced soccer when I’m Scottish so wouldn’t refer to it as that) 

That bit wasn't aimed at you.  Sorry if you thought it was.

9 hours ago, WhiteWall said:

Read my other post. I was referring to the three defeats in a row, not the balance of play. Regardless of how Tottenham played against us for the last 20 years, we have owned them at the Bridge and at Three Point Lane. Sadly, a fading memory.

Fair enough, mate - I thought you were just referring to last night.  You're right, a sad state of affairs at the moment, but last night gave me hope.

A far better performance than the last time we played them at Wembley, thankfully.

We do need a focal point for Hazard to play off or alongside.

VAR 1-0 Chelsea !

The whole point of VAR is to make sure they get absolutely crucial decisions right.

They can’t even get it right! Clowns!

2 hours ago, bluedave said:

In my mind, if you need multi-angle freeze-frames to see if an attacker might be 1cm further forward than the attacker then he's not offside. I thought everybody agreed about this when Morata had those two go offside decisions go against him recently.

Trouble is Kane is not 1cm further forward, he's the width of his upper body offside, probably about 10-12 inches.

I enjoyed seeing us school them on possession and retrieval, especially the second half,

 

2 hours ago, bluedave said:

In my mind, if you need multi-angle freeze-frames to see if an attacker might be 1cm further forward than the attacker then he's not offside. I thought everybody agreed about this when Morata had those two go offside decisions go against him recently.

You’re right Dave with decisions made by the assistant, he should give benefit of the doubt to the attacker. Last night  the VAR image, although it was unclear, I thought you must go with the attack. However if the angles are right and it clearly shows off side, which it does, then the correct decision of offside must be made.

last nights decision on images provided was correct in my opinion but why VAR not have access to sky images.

 

4 minutes ago, goose said:

last nights decision on images provided was correct in my opinion but why VAR not have access to sky images.

 

VAR needs at least 4 cameras in each half for offside videos, one on the center circle, two in mid half, and one on the penalty area.

Imagine having goal line technology......on the 6yd box line. 

35 minutes ago, goose said:

You’re right Dave with decisions made by the assistant, he should give benefit of the doubt to the attacker. Last night  the VAR image, although it was unclear, I thought you must go with the attack. However if the angles are right and it clearly shows off side, which it does, then the correct decision of offside must be made.

last nights decision on images provided was correct in my opinion but why VAR not have access to sky images.

 

3

That's the bit I'm not sure about. In the still image he's standing level with the Azpilicueta but is leaning forward (as you'd expect for somebody who is running). So although they are standing level, his head is slightly closer to the goal. The thing is, there is some temporal uncertainty when you're looking at a still image. Is the image taken at the instant the Spurs midfielder's foot first makes contact with the ball, or at the instant when his foot loses contact with the ball? We're talking about a fraction of a second here but it's enough to make a difference. For this reason I'd argue there's still enough uncertainty here that the attacker should be given the benefit of the doubt, and I'm certain that if Kane was a Chelsea player the majority here would agree with me.

I think the main problem is, the linesman put his flag up, which means our defenders thought it was offside and hesitated, but then it was brought back as not offside. That's not how it's supposed to work. The linesman is supposed to keep his flag down if its close, let the play go on, then VAR can rule it out.

Thinking about it, with modern computing power it's possible to take the image that VAR had below, and render a new image level with the line. Sky do it all the time in the studio, they freeze the play and move the camera around the pitch.

22 minutes ago, Zeta said:

I think the main problem is, the linesman put his flag up, which means our defenders thought it was offside and hesitated, but then it was brought back as not offside. That's not how it's supposed to work. The linesman is supposed to keep his flag down if its close, let the play go on, then VAR can rule it out.

I agree with Sarri but I also think that's a convenient excuse, the players should play to the whistle not the linesman's flag.

Edited January 9, 20197 yr by the special one

so basically all var achieved last night was making sure that kane got a penalty that he shouldn't have

basically nothing will change with VAR next year for us.

I just think if the linesman flags and VAR is indecisive, then it should go back to the linesmans decision since he is in the best place to judge it anyway. 

Sky still not admitting it was a wrong call. 

I don't trust VAR in England at the moment, so many wrong decisions. 

At the world cup it seemed to work much better imo.

13 hours ago, Oli said:

So we have had countless wrong offside decisions in recent weeks that have cost us big pointsin the title race. There is no Var to correct it.

And today we play in a competition where there is VAR, the linesmen gives offside and what do you know, now VAR comes into play. And to top it off he actually was offside. How many times can they continuously screw us over. Had Morata scored against saints and got a penalty against Everton, we would be 6 points off the top.

How can a VAR system be so flawed that they dont even have clear or multiple camera angles. So much so that we had to bring out a laptop after the game to show Kane was offside. 

When sh*t continously goes against you its called being bent. Var or no Var, we're still having it up the arse.

7 hours ago, Scott Harris said:

I have seen 3 big decisions where VAR was used in our games.......and each time they got it wrong. 

Two against Norwich last season in the F.A cup. The ref said Willian dived and he booked Willian, VAR proved that he was actually fouled and that it should have been a penalty to us. But VAR didn't over turn the refs decision, they used that bullsh*t "clear and obvious" line to bail the ref out. Well it was clear and obvious, Willian was fouled and the ref got it wrong.

The second in that match was against Morata. He was fouled near the end of the game and was booked, and again, VAR didn't overturn the decision.

Now in this game, they use a sh*tty camera angle which makes it look like Kane's upper half of his body is onside. This angle above, which is the angle that should have been used to judge if somebody is offside or not, clearly shows that the upper half of Kane's body is offside when the ball is played.

This is why I am not as enthusiastic about it being bought in as some other people are. It's a system that can and already has been wrongly used. I still don't think we will get big calls in our favour once it's bought in permanently. As long as they use angles like they used today to judge if somebody is offside or not, or if they use the "it wasn't clear and obvious" excuse, then VAR will never work.

Its on purpose........of course it is. This way they can still influence games where need be....... a Billion Pounds empire cant even get the angles right? All went as planned.

2 hours ago, coco said:

Thinking about it, with modern computing power it's possible to take the image that VAR had below, and render a new image level with the line. Sky do it all the time in the studio, they freeze the play and move the camera around the pitch.

That is my issue with this view, is that it is not 'level with play'. Saying that though, even with this angle you can see that Kane's torso is offside !. And yes I agree why can't they provide a level view, oh wait a minute, Sarri showed one to the press.